You Paid by IBAN — Now What? The Criminal and Administrative Liability of a Prostitution Client in Turkey

While digital payment systems make our lives easier, they also make certain legal risks visible. Payments made by bank transfer or via IBAN, rather than in cash, now make every transaction traceable and provable. So what does this mean for a person who is party to a relationship considered sensitive and intimate? In this article, we examine the real legal position of a person in the role of a "prostitution client" under the Turkish Penal Code (TCK) and the Misdemeanors Law, in light of current decisions of the Yargıtay (Court of Cassation).

Why This Matters

A widespread misconception in society is that a person who has a sexual encounter in exchange for money "commits a crime" just like the other party. In reality, the Turkish legal system approaches the issue from a much more technical and narrow framework. Not knowing this distinction can lead people either to fear judicial processes unnecessarily, or conversely to fail to recognize the real risks (administrative fines, the obligation to testify as a witness, the threat of blackmail).

Summary of the Situation

A person reaches an agreement with someone they contacted via social media or another channel, sends a certain sum in return to that person's bank account (IBAN), and subsequently has a sexual encounter with them. The fact that the payment was made through a bank channel rather than in cash renders the transaction fully traceable and recorded. The person concerned wonders whether this act will have any criminal consequences for them.

The Legal Issue

Article 227 of the Turkish Penal Code (TCK), under the heading "prostitution," expressly limits who may be punished. The acts punished under the text of the law are encouraging prostitution, facilitating it as an intermediary, providing premises for it, or coercing someone into it. The legislator has not introduced any provision directly punishing the person who engages in prostitution or the client who pays for that service.

At this point, three separate legal dimensions arise:

1. The criminal law dimension: Does the client's act constitute a crime under the TCK?
2. The administrative law dimension: Is there a risk of administrative sanctions under the Misdemeanors Law?
3. The evidence and procedure dimension: How might the IBAN record, as evidence, draw the client into a future legal process?

What Does the Yargıtay (Court of Cassation) Say?

The Client Bears No Criminal Liability

Settled case law clearly establishes that the client's act does not constitute a crime within the meaning of the TCK:

• Yargıtay 4th Criminal Chamber, E. 2021/18538, K. 2021/21301, T. 2021: In the assessment contained in the decision, with reference to the relevant decision of the Constitutional Court, it was found that "since engaging in prostitution is not defined as a crime under Turkish law, the person who engages in prostitution does not commit a crime; nor does the act of the prostitution client constitute a crime."
• Yargıtay 18th Criminal Chamber, E. 2019/898, K. 2020/1559, T. 2020: It was emphasized that the legislator punishes not the person engaging in prostitution, but the person who acts as an intermediary, facilitates it, provides premises for it, or encourages it.
• Yargıtay 9th Criminal Chamber, E. 2023/9338, K. 2023/5728, T. 2023: In a case involving a consensual sexual encounter in exchange for a benefit, the defendant was acquitted.
• Yargıtay 18th Criminal Chamber, E. 2015/23534, K. 2017/10901, T. 2017: It was stated that the act of engaging in a relationship in exchange for money is not, on its own, sufficient for punishment; additional elements such as encouraging prostitution or profiting from its proceeds must be present.
• Yargıtay 18th Criminal Chamber, E. 2019/12197, K. 2019/16892, T. 2019: It was held that the act of a person who paid the expenses of the other party did not constitute the crime of "profiting from the earnings of a person driven into prostitution."

There Is a Risk of Administrative Sanctions

Even though imprisonment is not at issue, a risk of administrative sanctions may arise under the Misdemeanors Law No. 5326:

• Article 32 (Acting Contrary to an Order): Violating general anti-prostitution orders issued by provincial governorships for the protection of public order or public health may be subject to an administrative fine.
• Article 37 (Causing Disturbance): In some practice, this article has also been extended and applied to prostitution clients.

The Witness and Evidence Risk

The Yargıtay General Assembly of Criminal Chambers, E. 2019/627, K. 2022/477, T. 2022 decision contains a notable exception: a person who engaged in a paid relationship was punished under TCK 227/2 because they had additionally participated in the act of facilitating prostitution by distributing business cards. This shows that the risk increases where there is an active act of "facilitation" going beyond merely making a payment.

Furthermore, as seen in Yargıtay 18th Criminal Chamber, E. 2020/844, K. 2020/7838, T. 2020 and Yargıtay 4th Criminal Chamber, E. 2021/13210, K. 2023/23403, T. 2023, clients' payments and statements have been used as evidence in the conviction of persons acting as intermediaries in prostitution. This means that a person who pays via IBAN may be summoned to give a statement as a witness in an investigation into "acting as an intermediary in prostitution" or "providing premises" conducted against the other party.

Points to Watch

• The permanence of the bank record: A transfer made via IBAN is strong and permanent evidence of the existence of the relationship between the parties. If the other party becomes the subject of an investigation, this record can be identified by law enforcement.
• The age of the other party is critically important: If the person who received the payment is under 18, the situation changes completely, and the person may face serious criminal liability under the TCK provisions on sexual abuse of children or sexual intercourse with a minor.
• The identity of the account holder matters: Whether the payment was made directly to the person providing the service or to a third party who is "running" them determines the direction of the evidentiary process.
• The blackmail risk: The other party knowing your identity can lay the groundwork for a future blackmail attempt (TCK 107). If faced with such a threat, the judicial authorities should be contacted immediately.

Conclusion: What Should You Do?

Although the Turkish legal system does not directly punish the prostitution client, this does not mean the person faces no legal risk at all.

• Remember that a payment made via IBAN is permanent evidence; this may give rise to a future obligation to testify as a witness.
• Do not act without being certain that the other party is of legal age; this is the single most critical factor that can fundamentally change the entire legal situation.
• If you are summoned to give a statement in the course of an investigation, stay calm; manage the process knowing that your act does not constitute a crime within the meaning of the TCK, while keeping in mind the possibility of an administrative sanction.
• If you face blackmail or a threat of exposure, do not give in to the threat — immediately consult a criminal law attorney and, if necessary, apply to the public prosecutor's office.